| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same comment as for the Jena proposal.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| private static void throwOnError(final Response.ResponseInfo responseInfo) { | ||
| if (!Response.isSuccess(responseInfo.statusCode())) { | ||
| throw new ClientHttpException( | ||
| "Could not map to an RDF4J entity.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The real issue is that the request failed rather been an issue mapping it to a RDF4J entity. Is this message a bit misleading?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see your point. Is 475adc0 better?
Sorry, something went wrong.
* Revert "JCL-402: RDF4J body handlers http error handling (#1162)" This reverts commit e03eb1e. * Revert "JCL-402: JSONB test coverage (#1184)" This reverts commit 52d485b. * Revert "JCL-402: HTTP error handling in JenaBodyHandlers (#1159)" This reverts commit 89534b4. * Move ProblemDetails to solid module, remove ClientHttpException * ProblemDetails to interface in API module
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
This is based on #1159 , which should be reviewed first. (The only dependency between the two is in the mocks)
This deprecates the current methods in RDF4JBodyHandlers, and replaces them with similar method throwing an appropriate exception with error details on HTTP error instead of returning an empty dataset. This makes use of the composable throwing body handler now exposed by the Response interface of the api module. The new method now have RDF4J in their name for this not to be a breaking change: ofModel becomes ofRDF4JModel, etc.